Eddie James Tips

The Esoteric Tipster | 18+ 🔞 Pronouns: Tip, Tipself.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

https://t.co/emfp8kmE93

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

@stephenpollard I have requested a Community Note - others should do the same.

Lewis is IS lying.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

@AbbyNormalSF @SenecaSpeaks21 The Left all hate each other, though.

Sooner or later they fall out - almost always over something trivial.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

@ConceptualJames Because he's simplistic.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Read this, Jonathan!

Happy to argue it on moral grounds, since you asked.

"Most people find it grotesque" is a headcount, not a moral argument. Most people also think raising interest rates increases inflation, the opposite of what's true, and only a quarter say they understand inflation's causes well by their own admission. Majorities believe wrong things constantly. Polling has never been evidence of a policy being right.

The actual moral case: a wealth tax punishes success rather than fraud, taxes money already earned and already taxed on the way there, and requires the state to annually value assets with no market price, land, businesses, art, decided by people with every incentive to value it upward. That's not technocratic detail, that's arbitrary state power over what people own.

And the practical immorality you're skipping past: capital doesn't stay to be taxed, it leaves. Every serious attempt at this has watched its wealthiest, most mobile people relocate, taking jobs and investment with them. The people left holding the bag aren't the rich. They're the employees whose jobs depended on that capital staying. A policy that fails on its own terms while hurting the people it claims to protect isn't brave. It's just badly thought through.

[Jonathan Hinder MP @Jonathan_Hinder]

@JamesCleverly Read the tweet, James!

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Happy to argue it on moral grounds, since you asked.

"Most people find it grotesque" is a headcount, not a moral argument. Most people also think raising interest rates increases inflation, the opposite of what's true, and only a quarter say they understand inflation's causes well by their own admission. Majorities believe wrong things constantly. Polling has never been evidence of a policy being right. 61% believe in ghosts - and that's just stupid.

The actual moral case: a wealth tax punishes success rather than fraud, taxes money already earned and already taxed on the way there, and requires the state to annually value assets with no market price, land, businesses, art, decided by people with every incentive to value it upward. That's not technocratic detail, that's arbitrary state power over what people own.

And the practical immorality you're skipping past: capital doesn't stay to be taxed, it leaves. Every serious attempt at this has watched its wealthiest, most mobile people relocate, taking jobs and investment with them. The people left holding the bag aren't the rich. They're the employees whose jobs depended on that capital staying. A policy that fails on its own terms while hurting the people it claims to protect isn't brave. It's just badly thought through.

[Jonathan Eric Lewis @LewisJonathanE]

When I was a graduate student at Emory, I taught a class on comparative genocides

We studied the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, and the Rwandan genocide, specifically. Students, piqued by curiosity, were asked to describe how these horrific events were similar and how they were different

Fast forward to 2026 and now 'genocide' is mainly used as a rhetorical weapon, meant to delegitimize Jewish peoplehood and to manufacture consent for the abuse and harassment of Jews

There is no attempt to understand the term or to learn about actual genocides. Few people who scream 'genocide' on here have ever read a book on the topic. Many, lacking reading comprehension skills, are simply incapable of doing so

If you don't think this is going to effect how politics are conducted in the United States going forward, I have a bridge to sell you

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

There's good economics behind this too. Giuliano and Spilimbergo, NBER, found that people who lived through a recession in their formative years form beliefs, luck over effort, more redistribution, less trust in institutions, that persist for life regardless of what happens afterward. The anchoring isn't just psychological. It gets built once, early, and mostly stays put. https://t.co/QsVEGSp7L1

[Chris Fawcett @chrisgambler247]

'Now is the time for racing to come together and take the Gambling Commission on in the High Court'
https://t.co/vKWIPUdqBU

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Liar.

ICJ has NOT accused Israel of genocide.

Lied to the House, lied to the people and lied on X.

[Clive Lewis MP @labourlewis]

When the ICJ has accused the Israeli state of genocide, it’s clear that MPs of all parties should be condemn them. Failing to do so undermines our ability to hold up international law.

Andy Burnham’s apology yesterday was a start. But words need to be backed up with decisive action – starting with a total ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

@Madz_Grant Boulton's such a typical broadcaster.

In terms of overvalued occupations, his must rank near the top.

Pompous wanker.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

@AndrewGold_ok She was sincere. I reckon less than 1% of politicians are.

Disagreed with most of what she said but she was hard not to like.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Respecting someone for living by their principles only works if the principles were actually her's to begin with.

A lot of what gets called conviction on the Palestinian cause traces straight back to Andropov's KGB. Pacepa testified Operation SIG was built specifically to instil that framing. The Mitrokhin Archive independently confirms Arafat was trained and run by Soviet intelligence.

Sincerity isn't the same as having arrived at a belief honestly. Worth separating the two before calling either one admirable.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Excellent piece, @Tom_Slater_.

Racing is full of people who'll tell you all about the winners they've had, right up until you ask to see the record. Stevenson is the same act in a different market. Claims Citibank's best trader ever, "an accomplishment none of his former colleagues can recall". Calls himself one of the best inequality economists in the world off the back of one memoir.

The record is everything. Everything else is just noise in a hoodie.

[Tom Slater @Tom_Slater_]

‘Gary Stevenson’s rise is a symptom of Long Corbyn — the simpleminded, moralising leftism that captured the Labour Party and the hearts of Belsize Park just over 10 years ago, and our politics has been struggling to shake off ever since’

Me on Gary Stevenson for @spikedonline

[James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames]

Never Again is now.

[James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames]

Never Again is now.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Sure. But Murphy is just as bad.

[Julian Jessop @julianHjessop]

Another scathing review from a notorious right-wing shill... 😉

"I watched Gary Stevenson's Channel 4 documentary, How to Get Filthy Rich, last night. I have a recommendation for you. It is that you do not waste your time."

https://t.co/VCowtDp6mX

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

It's not Hendrix but it's excellent.

https://t.co/klgq9dBJOH

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

@K_Niemietz Bastani sounds quite posh himself.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

@donororgans No new argument in that one. I'll let the thread stand.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Tokyo, Britain, Houston. Still sitting there untouched. "Stupid", "tantrum" and "you can't read" aren't a rebuttal, they're what's left once the argument runs out. Thanks for confirming which one this was.

[You paid for this? @donororgans]

@EddieJamesTips I replied to the others fork your tantrum created, stupid.

[Eddie James Tips @EddieJamesTips]

Debating is easy when you know the facts.

You've run out of road. Your argument failed, so you invented ones to bicker with instead. When that failed, you moved to insults. Now you're policing where I reply.

Buried in there is your one real point: does market supply alone reach the bottom decile fast enough, or does that group need direct intervention regardless? Fair question. Answer: probably both. Supply drops the price the market has to solve for, direct support handles who's left after that. Nobody serious argues supply alone fixes every case. That was never my claim, same as "guarantee" and "solved" weren't.